BOISE, Idaho (AP) -- Environmentalists are blasting a Bush administration proposal to lift a ban on logging in remote areas of national forests, saying the move ignores popular support for protecting forests.

The plan announced Monday would allow logging by permitting roads to be constructed in national forests. Governors would have to petition the federal government to block road building.

"When the Forest Service originally proposed protecting these special places to hunt, fish and camp, the millions of public comments received were overwhelmingly supportive," Idaho Conservation League spokesman John Robinson said. "There's no reason to drag out this fight."

Is it just me or do both Bush and Kerry intend on annihilating America in the next 4 years They're just whacked! Both of them!!

And, at the same time, GP and IP are selling off millions of acres in their traditional logging grounds in Maine. Something's fishy about this. They are probably rubbing their greedy hands to cut down some old growth trees rather than having to reseed their own property. We must protect our environment if our race is to have any future.

Under the proposal, the 58.5 million acres designated as roadless among the 191 million acres of national forest will be protected from development for another 18 months.

In 2006, each governor may submit a proposal either to continue protecting the roadless land or allow it opened to multiple use. The federal government would consider each state petition and then issue a regulation determining the extent of future roadless protection

What's wrong with that? The states and the people therein can choose what to do with the land in their own state...

What about states' rights? People are trying to make this out to be something horrible and immoral...I fail to see how it is either of these two; rather, it is something that should have been done a lot sooner!

(Remember, they're not going to be putting subdivisions in these national forests - there are laws to prevent that! If anything, they'll put roads through for bicyclists, hikers, etc., and bathrooms and campsites.
It'll only be something good for the taxpayers - the forest will be there, and everyone is happy.)

There is nothing wrong with timber harvesting. Timber harvesting, if done correctly, is environmentally benign. In many situations it is environmentally helpful. Our people pioneered the scientific management of forests in Germany centuries ago. All he is doing is repealing a Bill Clinton decree that shut down vast parts of the National Forest System to any kind of management. Environmentalist policies of the last 30 years have devastated white communities in the rural west, the very communities that Bob Mathews tried to make a home in. The same communities I live in.

Furthermore, you've seen all these wildfires on the news in the last few years? There are a direct result of gross federal mismanagement of forest land. Millions and millions more acres burn every year in devastating wildfires, yet the Forest Service literally can't manage a stick of timber. The most destructive means of logging ever conceived of could not compare to the waste and devastation caused by today's wildfires. Did you know one fire in Oregon 3 years ago burned an area 2/3 the size of the state of Rhode Island? Hundreds of millions of dollars were spend trying to stop it. Over a millions dollars was spent on HAY alone, which was used to try to prevent erosion. Have you ever seen the kind of destruction caused by fires so huge and intense they spawn tornadoes that rip trees from the ground and create their own thunderstorms? I think not. I have.

It's fine with me if you don't know anything about natural resource management, but don't parade your ignorance around here and expect those of us who know better to let it go. Some of you are obviously pretty far removed from the ways of our rural ancestors.